People frequently ask me why I picked such a title; and in fact some people apparently don't believe that I really did so, since I've seen at least one bibliographic reference to some books called "The Act of Computer Programming."

In this talk I shall try to explain why I think "Art" is the appropriate word. I will discuss what it means for something to be an art, in contrast to being a science; I will try to examine whether arts are good things or bad things; and I will try to show that a proper viewpoint of the subject will help us all to improve the quality of what we are now doing.

One of the first times I was ever asked about the title of my books was in 1966, during the last previous ACM national meeting held in Southern California. This was before any of the books were published, and I recall having lunch with a friend at the convention hotel. He knew how conceited I was, already at that time, so he asked if I was going to call my books "An Introduction to Don Knuth." I replied that, on tile contrary, I was naming the books after him. His name: Art Evans. (The Art of Computer Programming, in person.)

An alternative is to edit their CSS to address the first three of your points.

My point is: there are plenty of tools you can use to make web pages appear how you would like them to appear, such as: browser extensions; custom style sheets (e.g., Firefox's userContent.css); and GreaseMonkey.

"...told Bloomberg that Apple next iPhone models will come with..." and "...would be Apple largest iPhones."

Why not "Apple's next iPhone" and "Apple's largest iPhones?" Because as girlintraining posted elsewhere,

"Dice doesn't have dedicated slashdot editors anymore. They are editors of a dozen or so sites. Really now, what kind of quality do you expect now that they've sold out and now monetize the web synergies to create a new market paradigm of customer-focused informational advertisements?"

PatPending writes: FTFA: Google has made it clear that people who send or receive email via Gmail should not expect their messages to remain private.

In a 39-page motion filed in June to have a class-action data-mining lawsuit dismissed, the Web giant cites Smith v. Maryland, a 1979 Supreme Court decision that upheld the collection of electronic communications without a warrant.

"Just as a sender of a letter to a business colleague cannot be surprised that the recipient's assistant opens the letter, people who use web-based email today cannot be surprised if their emails are processed by the recipient's [email provider] in the course of delivery. Indeed, 'a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.'"

PatPending writes: Anytime, anywhere: co-workers, strangers, and others are using their smart phones to secretly take your photograph, record your conversations, and record videos to potentially be used against you. What can one do to protect one's right to privacy in the face of technology? (Aside from never leaving your mom's basement.)